|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
California's Half-Measures on Guns and Ammo Clips Won't Work
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://inrigare.wordpress.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
As a gun owner, it was interesting reading about the regulations being considered in California. ("California's proposed gun laws won't change our culture of violence, but they will make us safer," editorial, April 22) I take exception to SB 1407, which would require that gun parts like a lower receiver be registered by the owner. This places the burden on the wrong party. There is no way to ensure the buyer will follow through and register a receiver. |
| Comment by:
dasing
(4/25/2016)
|
| Please note an ammo clip only holds 5 rounds, magazines hold a lot more rounds. |
| Comment by:
jac
(4/25/2016)
|
This has nothing to do with reducing crime or saving lives.
It is all about control and turning honest law abiding people into felons. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
